Post your key date coins! 0

[erwindoc]

Just added this one to my collection, what are yours???
 

 

[numisport]

[Coinbuf]

[erwindoc]

[Matt_dac]

[Johnny Reed Collection]

[kbbpll]

[Timely]

[World Colonial]

A few liberal interpretations of "key date" here.

[Revenant]

The 1888 has the lowest mintage in the Netherlands Willem III 10G set, with just 35,585 struck that year. The 1887 isn't far behind at 40,754 minted that year.

Of course, both of these are pretty common compared to the 1879/7 variety, which NGC includes a slot for in the set, but they're both very rare and hard to find compared to the 1875, with a mintage of about 4.1 million or the 1876, with a mintage of about 1.5 million.

[World Colonial]

With world coinage, there are many series where there are more key dates than non-key, using the US definition.  That's true of my primary collection now which I have mentioned several times here.  Even the more available dates are (a lot) more difficult to buy than most US key date coins.

One example I don't actively buy (since I can't find anything) is the Chile Lion and Castle (same design as my avatar which is from Mexico) quarter real.  It was struck from 1796-1818 with a few earlier dates having a slightly modified design.  The 1817 is a known hoard coin (I own the MS-67) and the 1818 is occasionally for sale (seen it maybe five times in AU or MS). 

I can count on one hand (literally) the number of decent coins from other dates I have seen in almost 20 years, excluding a few details examples offered by Sedwick this year or last.  I also own the 1810 NGC AU-55, Sedwick offered the 1816 NGC AU-50 (which I missed), I previously owned the NGC 1808 (or 1814) XF-45 and Heritage sold one of the other dates recently in XF-40.

The ANS has a mostly complete set but not the 1810 (last I checked).  I have not had the opportunity to inspect it.

[SilverShilling]

On 11/26/2019 at 8:08 PM, World Colonial said:

With world coinage, there are many series where there are more key dates than non-key, using the US definition.  That's true of my primary collection now which I have mentioned several times here.  Even the more available dates are (a lot) more difficult to buy than most US key date coins.

One example I don't actively buy (since I can't find anything) is the Chile Lion and Castle (same design as my avatar which is from Mexico) quarter real.  It was struck from 1796-1818 with a few earlier dates having a slightly modified design.  The 1817 is a known hoard coin (I own the MS-67) and the 1818 is occasionally for sale (seen it maybe five times in AU or MS). 

I can count on one hand (literally) the number of decent coins from other dates I have seen in almost 20 years, excluding a few details examples offered by Sedwick this year or last.  I also own the 1810 NGC AU-55, Sedwick offered the 1816 NGC AU-50 (which I missed), I previously owned the NGC 1808 (or 1814) XF-45 and Heritage sold one of the other dates recently in XF-40.

The ANS has a mostly complete set but not the 1810 (last I checked).  I have not had the opportunity to inspect it.

I have a few Santiago cuartillas of the castle and lion type, but not in very good condition.

Edited December 1, 2019 by SilverShilling

[World Colonial]

On ‎11‎/‎30‎/‎2019 at 9:43 PM, SilverShilling said:

I have a few Santiago cuartillas of the castle and lion type, but not in very good condition.

The 1810 you have is much better than most for this series.  I'd grade it a better VF by US standards. 

Other than the ANS collection, I only know of maybe two other collections.  PCGS lists a number of these coins (not near complete set but quite a few) in XF.  It's possible or even likely all or most are owned by the same collector.  Spanish auction firm Aureo & Calico included a low number of XF to AU (by US grading standards) in a 2002 sale.

[SilverShilling]

Thank you for your reply, @World Colonial, I collect Santiago mint coins, both Colonial and so am always searching for interesting pieces and I agree with you, nice So mint cuartillas are not easy to find. I do think, however, that they are more plentiful in Chile (among local collectors) than abroad.   

 

 

[robec1347]

Edited December 21, 2019 by robec1347

[CharlotteDude]

[jgrinz]

[Abuelo's Collection]

I am sure even @World Colonial will agree these are key by any standard...

Happy New Year to all!

 

[SilverShilling]

This Pitt farthing, struck in 1766 to commemorate William Pitts's efforts top repeal the Stamp Act is probably one of the more significant additions to my collection. A scarce item with historical appeal.

A recent census of Pitt Farthings lists a total of 25 examples known and documented, including this example.    

Edited December 30, 2019 by SilverShilling
Omission

[numisport]

Key date proof cameo Lincoln

[World Colonial]

On 12/17/2019 at 8:24 AM, SilverShilling said:

Thank you for your reply, @World Colonial, I collect Santiago mint coins, both Colonial and so am always searching for interesting pieces and I agree with you, nice So mint cuartillas are not easy to find. I do think, however, that they are more plentiful in Chile (among local collectors) than abroad.   

 

 

I will be surprised if this is true, except maybe in the lowest grades.  Most of the better Latin coinage seems to be owned elsewhere, mostly by US collectors since they have the affinity for it and find the coins cheap versus US coins.

As one example, on one occasion someone posted pictures (on another forum) of the Peru (equivalent) mint collection pillar coinage.  I can't tell you if the photos included all of it but the five denominations were of low quality, damaged or both.  Since I know the mintages disproportionately were not low, it should be evident that if the coins were available in any supply locally, this collection would have better examples.  The Mexico national collection is much better but much of it still consists of "problem" coins.  To my knowledge, much of it was donated by a prominent collector.

I have not searched diligently for this series but have looked for it, regularly.  A few of the dates are common or relatively common but that is all: 1813 Mo, 1821G and 1817So appear to be the most common and I own all three in MS-66/MS-66/MS-67.  I would describe a few additional dates as somewhat or occasionally available in better quality but that is all.

[World Colonial]

On 12/29/2019 at 2:13 PM, Abuelo's Collection said:

I am sure even @World Colonial will agree these are key by any standard...

Happy New Year to all!

 

The 1832 CAR coin is certainly a key date.  I am not familiar with the scarcity of the other two but given what I have seen of your collection, agree with you.

[SilverShilling]

25 minutes ago, World Colonial said:

I will be surprised if this is true, except maybe in the lowest grades.  Most of the better Latin coinage seems to be owned elsewhere, mostly by US collectors since they have the affinity for it and find the coins cheap versus US coins.

I participate in Chilean FB Numismatic groups, and cuartillas (which if you read my statement carefully, is what I was referring to), are posted there with some regularity, including some dates and a type which is seldom seen outside the country. Some of these may be MD finds, something which would not be unusual for these tiny coins. 

By the way, I would never make a statement which is 'untrue'. This statement is backed by my 35 year + experience with latin American coinage. 

[World Colonial]

1 minute ago, SilverShilling said:

I participate in Chilean FB Numismatic groups, and cuartillas (which if you read my statement carefully, is what I was referring to), are posted there with some regularity, including some dates and a type which is seldom seen outside the country. Some of these may be MD finds, something which would not be unusual for these tiny coins. 

By the way, I would never make a statement which is 'untrue'. This statement is backed by my 35 year + experience with latin American coinage. 

Like I stated in my last post, I have not looked for the coins diligently.  Apparently, it is more common than I thought.

I was using Peru pillar coinage as a point of comparison, as it is one I do collect diligently and have for many years. It's possible that the coins are more common than I believe locally but it's irrelevant to the point I was making because most aren't collectible (by US standards) anyway.  Most are either damaged (an example being holed) or of such low quality that few (if any) "advanced" collectors will want it.

I was also using the other quartillo mints as a point of comparison.  The other mints appear to be more common but this is an inference only.  I don't have access to the mintage records and have only seen data in isolation.  (CoinWiki lists 403,000 for the 1818 and 224,000 for the 1814.) I presume (not actually knowing) that since this series is more recent than Peru pillar 1/2R and 1R, that the mintages aren't "low" but can't confirm it.  Most of the Peru pillar 1/2R have recorded mintages from slightly over 100K to somewhat over 400K and 1R from slightly over 100K to about 250K.

If so, then yes, I can see these coins existing disproportionately in low quality by the hundreds or maybe a few thousand on occasion because it's consistent with a very low survival rate but on a large mintage for the time.

[Abuelo's Collection]

Thanks @World Colonial. The 1902/ INV 2 CNJQ peso is the only known (this series has a few rarities). As far as the 1823 2 reales, all Mexican coins minted in Central America are so rare, that perhaps all are key.